Problems with Duplicate Real Identification Driver License Card | Redacted

Redacted

 

Dated April 24, 2024

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I, Sarai Hannah Ajai, henceforth referred to as "the Complainant," am writing to express a grave concern regarding the replication of my Department of Transportation Driver License cards. On May **, ****, an employee of the Department of Transportation, Driver License Division duplicated my Real Identification Driver License cards using the same alphanumeric identifiers. However, I harbor doubts regarding the validity of the "DD" alphanumeric identifier on one of the  Real Identification Driver License cards created and dated May **, ****, as not referenced in the Lexis Nexis Consumer report case number *********.

 

Moreover, one of the duplicate entries onto the Lexis Nexis "Driver License Records" section presents discriminatory discrepancies. The first record entry, whether suspended, voided, or nullified, mirrors the information on my genuine Real Identification Driver License card, barring discrepancies in license status, height, and license class. These incongruities pose potential legal and discriminatory biometric profile problems, as my genuine Real Identification Driver License card, in my possession, indicates a height of 5’-08”, a license class of D, and does not specify a license status.

 

Additionally, the first record entry onto the Lexis Nexis consumer report fails to accurately represent the status of my Real Identification Driver License card, labeling it as "ACTIVE", while the second record entry erroneously lists a license status of “ACTIVE”, a height of 5’-05”, and a license class of "DRVD," which I do not legally possess. This discrepancies implies that the second duplicated card issued by the  Department of Transportation, Driver License Division, may have been produced to supersede or substitute my authentic  Real Identification Driver License card in my possession, potentially violating the Fifth Amendment's "Taking Clause" by unjustly seizing my true-identity, Real Identification Driver License card, and associated properties without due process of law and compensations.

 

For instance, when the State’s Department of Transportation unfairly imposed biased role preferences based on the Driver License Division Employees' subjective perceptions of my Department of Transportation Driver Licenses Division photograph dated May **, ****, the Driver Licenses Division Employee engaged in duplicative procedures, altering details and background information on my  State’s Real Identification Driver License Card, falsely claiming that my eyes were closed in the initial photograph without presenting evidence. This manipulation not only facilitated fraudulent national security background checks clearances but also resulted in the suspension or nullification of my genuine State, Real Identification Driver License Card in my possession. Such "taking" actions constitute violations of my private property rights for public use, placing me in a state of habeas corpus infringements, as the Driver Licenses Division Employee lacked judicial due process of law against me. Compensation should be afforded to me under the "Taking Clause" should the  State’s Department of Transportation fail to redress these infringements.

 

It is imperative that these discrepancies be rectified promptly to ensure the accuracy and legality of my driver's license information.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

Sarai Hannah Ajai